|
3 months ago ::
Feb 16, 2013 - 2:04AM
#21
|
Date Joined:
Dec 25, 2009
|
There is a Pro Tour this weekend. Watch some games and then tell me how many games ended while one of the players reches zero life (meaning they go through all the combat steps etc.). It is close to zero percent. Does this mean that all the people at the pro tour are rude?
Conceding a game does not mean - you suck and I don't want to play no more. It means you won. Simple as that. Disconecting or stalling on the other hand is rude. I would consider my opponent to be rude if s/he wasted my time while we both know the game is over and s/he cannot do anything to stop me. I consider it rude if you put me through clicking a houndred times just to see me actually end the match (via storm or combo).
It's in the rules of magic itself. The game ends when a players life equels zero, an effect says either of you won (or lost) OR one player concedes the game.
|
|
|
|
3 months ago ::
Feb 16, 2013 - 2:36AM
#22
|
Date Joined:
Dec 23, 2012
|
KritijanH, I didn't say they were rude necessarily. In fact if you read my messages on multiple occasions I said that I understand why people concede and that at least the etiquette online can be different to paper (not that it is wrong). Nowhere did I state that I wanted people not to have the right to concede. I simply said that I like the AI to take over when they do.
This occurs in Duels, and it is one of the features that I liked about Duels of the Planeswalkers (just like you liked other features of Duels). Not everything in Duels should be replicated in Magic Online, but that was a feature which I enjoyed. Duels however gets very boring because it's the same decks, over and over and over again...
|
|
|
|
3 months ago ::
Feb 16, 2013 - 5:22PM
#23
|
Date Joined:
Mar 12, 2004
|
Seems to me that there is an easy solution for this. WOTC should keep a quit % for each player, then when you set up a table have an option to only accept players joining with a quit % < X (user puts in X). This way for people who do not care about quitting they can set up games without this parameter, and for those that do care they can exclude them.
Even though my guess is coding this would be easy, WOTC probably does not see this as a problem worth spending even minimal time on.
|
|
|
|
3 months ago ::
Feb 16, 2013 - 5:42PM
#24
|
Date Joined:
Oct 10, 2007
|
Seems to me that there is an easy solution for this. WOTC should keep a quit % for each player, then when you set up a table have an option to only accept players joining with a quit % < X (user puts in X). This way for people who do not care about quitting they can set up games without this parameter, and for those that do care they can exclude them.
Even though my guess is coding this would be easy, WOTC probably does not see this as a problem worth spending even minimal time on.
This suggestion gets put forward every time this discussion occurs. It is flawed because it does not distinguish between quitters, and those who say gg and politely concede when the opponent is a turn away from winning (but their last chance to draw a card doesn't help them).
Punishing players for politely conceding in this situation is absurd.
|
|
|
|
3 months ago ::
Feb 16, 2013 - 5:50PM
#25
|
Date Joined:
Mar 12, 2004
|
Seems to me that there is an easy solution for this. WOTC should keep a quit % for each player, then when you set up a table have an option to only accept players joining with a quit % < X (user puts in X). This way for people who do not care about quitting they can set up games without this parameter, and for those that do care they can exclude them.
Even though my guess is coding this would be easy, WOTC probably does not see this as a problem worth spending even minimal time on.
This suggestion gets put forward every time this discussion occurs. It is flawed because it does not distinguish between quitters, and those who say gg and politely concede when the opponent is a turn away from winning (but their last chance to draw a card doesn't help them).
Punishing players for politely conceding in this situation is absurd.
They still quit - if you do not want the quit % to count against you then play it out (it is not a big time difference at that point anyway).
|
|
|
|
3 months ago ::
Feb 16, 2013 - 6:39PM
#26
|
Date Joined:
Oct 10, 2007
|
Seems to me that there is an easy solution for this. WOTC should keep a quit % for each player, then when you set up a table have an option to only accept players joining with a quit % < X (user puts in X). This way for people who do not care about quitting they can set up games without this parameter, and for those that do care they can exclude them.
Even though my guess is coding this would be easy, WOTC probably does not see this as a problem worth spending even minimal time on.
This suggestion gets put forward every time this discussion occurs. It is flawed because it does not distinguish between quitters, and those who say gg and politely concede when the opponent is a turn away from winning (but their last chance to draw a card doesn't help them).
Punishing players for politely conceding in this situation is absurd.
They still quit - if you do not want the quit % to count against you then play it out (it is not a big time difference at that point anyway).
Wrong, WRONG, and absolutely WRONG.
When the opponent is one turn away from winning (they get it next attack), and your last card draw doesn't save you, it not only polite to say gg and concede, but it's also considered rude to play it out - it wastes the winner's time that could be spent going onto the next game.
When a player concedes in this situation, they are not quitting. They are doing the accepted and expected thing.
|
|
|
|
3 months ago ::
Feb 16, 2013 - 7:51PM
#27
|
Date Joined:
Jul 20, 2007
|
There are people who do not understand the time honored tradition of gracefully exiting a game through Resignation. I have unbelievingly encountered this in Chess tourneys where one player's opponent would not accept a resignation because he felt the game should be played out and then took 45 moves to win. Someone mentioned there was an obscure rule about 50 moves without a mate after the last piece from one side (aside from the king) has been taken. I am pretty sure that's a house rule but at the time it made me laugh.
In MTG most paper players will accept a resignation done with some modicum of grace. Few are kurmudgeon enough to insist on playing out a lost position.
People concede online for the following reasons:
a)They have to go because a child/parent/SO fell down the stairs and needs to be ambulanced to the hospital. (Is that a verb? Ambulanced? it should be imho.)
b)They don't like your shampoo.
c)They suddenly realize their deck is terrible. Through no one else's fault their embarassment leads them to quit.
d)They suddenly realize they hate your name/avatar/deck. They don't want to be in the same game with you and leave.
e)You disrupted their ability to play the game and it feels demoralizing. So they leave.
f) You said something they didn't like, so offended, they take off.
g)You said nothing after an effusive and warm greeting. And continue to say nothing while playing mr Stonefaced Prowannabe so they take off.
h)You said something confusing and now they realize no longer know how to play the game competantly and so move to Africa to join a commune.
i)they have figured out by your 5th turn what deck you are playing, know it will take you 100 turns to completely win after locking them out on turn 4. So they split.
j)They left something undone and their spouse has come in and bullied them off the pc.
k)They left something undone and their boss has come in and bullied them off the pc.
l) They realize that they have a date and must leave in 2minutes or risk the wrath of their SO.
m)They see it is a lost cause and leave.
n) They failed to mulligan properly or mulliganed to a low amount of cards and believe they have little chance after seeing what you are playing.
The list is virtually endless. The bottom line is only a few of those quitters are quitting to be obnoxious joy-killers. And imho so what if they are obnoxious joy-killers?? Haven't you had your fun anyway winning? No? Maybe examine how you play your games then. Find people who share your enjoyment of durdle magic and get together and durdle instead of going for the throat. (A great Johnny engine can be fascinating the first time around at least.)
The reason it is probably safer to just forgive and forget is that games come every split second on the server. Perhaps not in the format of your choice but in general. And if you are playing in a niche format (for the room you are in at least) you may need to form a cabal to get decent games anyway.
In my opinion, you are perfectly capable of putting together lists of people you want to play with and don't want to play with ever again. The client doing this for you just saves you a little time and lets you prejudge others based on a number that as we pointed out doesn't necessarily tell the whole story.
Winter.Wolf
|
|
|
|
3 months ago ::
Feb 17, 2013 - 12:30AM
#28
|
Date Joined:
Dec 23, 2012
|
MTGO has taken a much cheaper route to deal with providing you continued enjoyment. In MTGO you can find a new game almost rightaway. All you need to do to really solve this perceived problem of yours, is to come to grips with the fact that you can't force anyone to do what they don't want to do. When someone concedes, you win, you move on to the next game. When a game is no longer fun for you (and no-one can tell YOU what you think is fun), you concede and move on to the next game. Simple.
Now I sense that you are really talking about a certain kind of behavior that you don't like. Well, in real life, if you don't like the behavior of someone, you don't ask for a robot who is nicer to you, you simply look for nicer ppl to hang with. The sore loser brats soon find themselves without ppl who want to play with them. It's a self correcting thing. MTGO offers tools for that too. You can block ppl, you can make a buddy list of ppl who act the way you like them to, you can create a "non-quitters" clan, and so on.
Nushae, you make some excellent points there.
The reason it is probably safer to just forgive and forget is that games come every split second on the server. Perhaps not in the format of your choice but in general. And if you are playing in a niche format (for the room you are in at least) you may need to form a cabal to get decent games anyway.
In my opinion, you are perfectly capable of putting together lists of people you want to play with and don't want to play with ever again. The client doing this for you just saves you a little time and lets you prejudge others based on a number that as we pointed out doesn't necessarily tell the whole story.
Telir, you have managed to convince me, your comments make a lot of sense.
|
|
|
|
3 months ago ::
Feb 17, 2013 - 1:58AM
#29
|
Date Joined:
Mar 20, 2003
|
There are people who do not understand the time honored tradition of gracefully exiting a game through Resignation. I have unbelievingly encountered this in Chess tourneys where one player's opponent would not accept a resignation because he felt the game should be played out and then took 45 moves to win. Someone mentioned there was an obscure rule about 50 moves without a mate after the last piece from one side (aside from the king) has been taken. I am pretty sure that's a house rule but at the time it made me laugh.
First about resignation, as a former chess player, I know for a fact that you cannot refuse a resignation. The notion is absurd. The FIDE rules don't allow it at all. Once you resign the game is over. Period. That simply cannot have been an official tournament.
It is possible to refuse to resign, and keep playing on in hopes of getting a draw, but in many cases this is only a very slim chance and then it is considered extremely rude. Basically you're saying "I think my opponent, despite getting me into this position, is bad enough that he'll mess up at the end". But hey, the rules say nothing about implicit rudeness, and chess players are among the sorest losers around, so I bet it happens now and then.
Second, the "house rule" that you speak of is official although not in the form you describe. This is understandable because it does not occur often and few know it.
In chess these are the ways to obtain a draw:
- agreement (obviously)
- stalemate - if one player can't make any move yet is not check mated, it's a draw
- repetition of moves - if at any point in time the same position on the board occurs for the third time, each time with the same player to move
- insufficient mating material - certain sets of pieces can't possibly create a check mate (eg. king + knight versus king), if that occurs it's a draw
- 50 moves rule - if for 50 moves, neither player moved a pawn or captured a piece (ie. 'made progress') the game is a draw.
|
|
|
|
3 months ago ::
Feb 17, 2013 - 4:52AM
#30
|
- Volunteer Community Lead
- blame me for the weather
Date Joined:
Feb 27, 2002
|
Second, the "house rule" that you speak of is official although not in the form you describe. This is understandable because it does not occur often and few know it.
In chess these are the ways to obtain a draw:
- agreement (obviously)
- stalemate - if one player can't make any move yet is not check mated, it's a draw
- repetition of moves - if at any point in time the same position on the board occurs for the third time, each time with the same player to move
- insufficient mating material - certain sets of pieces can't possibly create a check mate (eg. king + knight versus king), if that occurs it's a draw
- 50 moves rule - if for 50 moves, neither player moved a pawn or captured a piece (ie. 'made progress') the game is a draw.
To follow up on Nush (I know the rule even though I don't play chess), the 50-turn rule is predicated on making an irreversable action: neither capturing a piece nor moving a pawn forward can be "undone" by a later move.
Magic Online Volunteer Community Lead. • Also assisting the Paper Magic area for the time being. I'm trying to make my official VCL posts in purpleYou posted saying my thread was moved/locked but nothing happened. Spoiler:
Show
Unfortunately, VCLs do not currently have the tools necessary to take moderation actions directly. VCLs submit their actions to ORCs, who then actually perform the action. This processing can take between a few minutes and several hours, depending on how busy/attentive the ORCs are. If you see something that needs VCL attention, please use this thread (MTGO) or this thread (paper) to make a request and a VCL will look at it as soon as possible. CoC violations should be reported to Customer Service using the "report post" button. Please do not disrupt the thread by making requests of either kind in-thread.General MTGO FAQYes, the Shuffler is Random!The definitive thread on the Magic Online shuffler. Magic Math Made EasyDraw probabilities, Swiss results, Elo ratings and booster EV Event EV CalculatorCalculate the EV for any event with a fixed number of rounds and prizes based on record Dual means two. A duel is a battle between two people. Lands that make two colors of mana are dual lands. A normal Magic battle is a duel. Thanks to PhoenixLAU for the awesome avatar! Quotables Spoiler:
Show
"While a picture is worth a thousand words, each lolcat actually produces a negative wordcount." -Ith
"I think "Highly Informed Sarcasm" should be our Magic Online General motto." -Ith
"Sorry, but this thread seems just like spam. TT is for off-topic discussion, not no-topic discussion."
-WizO_Kwai_Chang
"Stop that! If you're not careful, rational thinking may catch on!" -Sax
"... the only word i see that fits is incompitant." -Mr44 (sic)
"You know a thread is gonna be locked when it gets to the hexadecimal stage." -Gathion
"It's a good gig" - Gleemax
"I tell people often, if you guys want to rant, you've certainly got the right to (provided you obey CoC/ToS stuff), and I don't even really blame you. But if you see something you think needs changing a well thought-out, constructive post does more to make that happen." - Worth Wollpert
|
|
|
